Chess clock set wrong in OTB tournament, Do I have rights to object to result?

So I'm quite curious, as I had some time to think about this...  What do you think?  Thanks in advance for any helpful comments :)

I recently played in a USCF rated tournament, in which the time control was G/60 with Delay of 6 seconds per move.  I had a TD set my (digital) clock and the game began.  What we both realized is later when we were both under 1 minute (so after a full 2 hours passed), is that the delay wasn't set.  I was okay with it, since it truly was the responsibility of the players at the beginning of the game to make sure the clock is set correctly/sufficiently and play on.

Problem now was that I feel I was hustled. My opponent (who had 4 seconds left on clock) pointed to my clock (after a roughly even game, he had slight advantage on position, claimed to stop clock and get TD to add delay.  Now my thinking is that it's unfair at this point (way late in the game, to decide to add delay ONLY when you have the advantageous position.  I feel we should play it out with how the clock was set, because he had the entire game to make sure delay is set. 

I ended up losing the game after TD added delay to clock - I was objecting when asked to add delay, because I felt it was wrong and I was being cheated.  His time was so low and I had a good minute on my clock still.  So if anything, he should be able to claim insuffiencient losing chances and draw should be actual result.

The game is over (obviously) and tournament was been rated.  I was so upset about it that I withdrew from the rest of the tournament and left. 

Do any of the readers feel I have any rights to object to what happened and claim a draw after the fact (possibly to re-rate this game?) by contacting the TD?  I didn't know of the USCF tournament rules, but felt I had no arguments because I read into the rules afterwards and seeing mixed messages in rules for setting/playing with settings of chess clock.  This happened just this past weekend.

When it was noticed that the delay wasn't working, it is perfectly allowed for the TD to configure the delay, when one of the players bring it to their attention.  Also, a claim of insufficient losing chances allows the TD to add a delay clock at that point.

The USCF Official Rules of Chess make it pretty clear that if delay is left off, it should be added as soon as the error is noticed. The TD made the right call.

From the first "TD Tip" under rule 16P: "Often digital and delay clocks are a challenge to set properly. The director should use judgment in deciding if a digital or delay clock was set improperly deliberately, or inadvertently. [...] In either case the error(s) should be corrected."

Thanks @Martin_Stahl and @Bramblyspam.  I appreciate your comments.  I figured that might be the case, but I thought I would ask anyways. 

@ChrisWainscott That's alright.  Obviously you didn't do that on purpose.  I was just frustrated about the whole thing and needed to vent about it.  I don't like the feeling where someone basically changes one thing and I have no say or power to play my position as I feel it was taken from me without my consent.  Obviously delay should have been set, I was just implying that since the game was started one way, it shouldn't have been changed in an instant when I had some chance of saving the game/position.  I made lots of inferior moves just to try to make him lose on time, and then this happened.  oh well.  not much I can do about it anywyas.  Thanks everyone for your input.  It boils down to I have to play better chess I guess.  I'm taking a break from OTB chess for a while.

Actually, only half of this is right.

As pointed out in post 3, if the time control is supposed to have a delay, and it's later noticed that the delay wasn't set, you correct the clock so that the settings are right.

In South Carolina last weekend, there was an incorrect setting.  Time control was G/120, d/5.  Well, instead of setting the clock for a hundred and twenty minutes, the top board in round 1 was set for an hour and twenty minutes.  They fixed it by adding 40 minutes to both players' clocks.

Same would be the case here.  You fix the clock so that delay is turned on.  You DO NOT add on 6 seconds for each move made to make up for time.  That is the players' problem.

Now what is wrong about the statement quoted above is the part on claiming insufficient losing chances, which can only be done when you are under 2 mintues - different from the 5 minutes it used to be 15 years ago.  The director is not allowed to simply set delay on the clock just because of that claim.  There is a specific procedure that must be taken:

1. The first step is asking the opponent if he wants a draw.  If you claim insufficent losing chances, you are in essence offering a draw indefinitely.  So if the opponent agrees to a draw, problem solved.
2. If the opponent rejects the draw offer, it is the director's job to first determine if a 1400 player would almost automatically draw against a GM.  For example, K+R vs K+R with no skewer available would be a case where even a 1400 would raw a GM.  K+R+6P vs K+R+6P should be rejected!  Too complicated.  "EQUAL" and "INSUFFICIENT LOSING CHANCES" are NOT the same thing.  NOTE:  If an ILC claim is outright rejected, 1 minute is taken off the clock of the player who made the claim.  If he has under a minute to begin with, he loses on time!
3. If the director believes that there is not quite enough evidence to accept the claim, and at the same time an obvious rejection is not appropriate, the director can, at his discression ONLY AFTER trying to resolve it via item number 2, get out a digital clock with time delay.  Here's the catch.  The player making the claim only gets half his time.  The opponent gets his full time.  So if the player making the claim has a minute and 24 seconds left, and the opponent has 5 minutes 17 seconds left, the opponent still gets the full 5 minutes 17 seconds with 5 second delay while the claimer only gets 42 seconds with 5 second delay.  At any point during this, if the opponent is clearly showing absolutely no sign of making even the most miniscule amount of progress (forcing h3 from White and hence weakening the g3 pawn is progess - doesn't mean you have to win material), then the director can stop the clocks and rule it a draw.  The player that didn't make the claim can still take a draw any time he wants to as long as he isn't checkmated.  ILC is an indefinite draw offer, but checkmate ends the game, so if he checkmates you, you can no longer accept the draw, but if he has mate in 1, don't move, stop the clock, and accept the claim!

Yes, insufficient losing chances has more information involved, and I am aware of it. I was just stating that if that had been claimed  a delay could be added to the game at that point, resulting in the same type of situation encountered.

And I don't think I would take half the time in this particular situation.

Of course, I run all my rated events with delay or increment, so I don't have to worry about the claim. In the OP situation, I would just put a delay clock on the game, or fix the existing one, if possible. 

Also, I'm pretty positive if the insufficient claim is not accepted as a draw, it is not indefinite. If the player that declined later is losing, they can't claim a draw.

OK, just read through the section in the 6th edition book,. It is a lot different than the 5th edition ruling.

First, if a delay clock wasn't available at the start of the game or if it was improperly set, then the only way to get a delay clock added is with the Insufficient Losing Chances claim.

Step one, the TD states that it is also a draw claim. If the draw is not immediately accepted or denied and a delay clock is available, it is added, with the same time penalty mentioned in post 7. The clock gets started and the draw offer is still on the table until the opponent makes his first move.

The rest of post 7 is accurate, if no delay clock is available,.

That all said, If I had been in the TD's shoes on that one, I still would have been tempted to place the delay clock since it was my error.

Tournament play (whether in chess, bridge, tennis, whatever) can be as much about managing temperament as it is about quality of play.  Someone who can blunder badly but come out fighting in the next round will make their mark.

So this experience gives you a chance to learn something about yourself and perhaps to improve yourself (as a chess player and possibly in other ways).

Getting cross and withdrawing was one way to go.  Getting the very most out of your inferior position, congratulating your opponent on his win, assuring Mr Wainscott that mistakes happen and that this is part of why (often unpaid and under appreciated) TDs are needed; and most importantly getting into the right frame of mind to contest the next round fiercely is another.

so @Martin_Stahl, does that mean that there shouldn't have been a delay clock setting added and we were suppose to play out the game as it was set?  if that is the case, I would have won the game since my opponent didn't ask for insuffiencient losing chances, although he probably would have (if he had option) and i would have agreed to draw.

Although at this point, there probably is nothing that can be changed, correct?

You know, I actually had a similar issue come up yesterday. There is actually a whole other section on incorrect clock settings. I have to reread some things on it. 

My previous interaction would have been to replace/reset the clock in such a situation. When I get a chance to reread a few different sections I'll provide a better answer 

blah, typo's

Ok i get the story but who plays with a 6 second delay?

i would just ask your opponent if he wants to play the game again

then you can play again with a new clock

This happened during a tournament.